Sunday, August 12, 2007

Amniocentesis

Genetics and pre-natal testing are often discussed among mothers of special-needs kids. I heard a recent conversation about the dangers of amniocentesis. Is it dangerous to the mother? Is there a risk of miscarriage? How can we lessen the likelihood of problems resulting from the test? Are the risks worth the benefits of the test?

And thereupon followed a nice, scientific, comforting discussion of how the risks are not that great, and it's worth it to have the peace of mind that comes from finding out your fetus is not afflicted with the same malady as your older child.

Not dangerous? Balderdash! Among this group of women, the whole point of amniocentesis is to KILL "defective" children! That's why people are taking the test. It may not be dangerous to the mother to have the test. It may not be dangerous to the child (assuming the child measures up to proper standards of genetic purity). But that test brings DEATH to the child who doesn't measure up.

Is it dangerous? Good grief. Death by torturous dismemberment, and burial by being sucked into a vacuum and tossed in the hazardous-waste pile. And people ask, "Is it dangerous?"

7 comments:

  1. Is there any good reason for it? Is there anything which can be treated in utero?

    Don't know, just asking. If the test is only to prepare you, reassure you or to kill the baby -- why have it?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I suspect that there may be some birth defects that could be treated in utero or to have surgeons ready for immediately after birth. Amniocentesis could probably detect some of those problems. But that was NOT what these women were discussing. The syndrome they were talking about cannot be treated any differently if you know ahead of time or if you don't. The test was a matter of reassuring them that the baby was all right. Or, if the baby wasn't, .....

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes, there are a few disorders (such as spina bifida) that can be treated through fetal surgery, some infections that can be treated if they are detected in the amniotic fluid, etc.

    However, even the procedure itself is not completely safe. There can be leaking of fluid after that, and damage to the baby. My cousin had a stillbirth only a day or two after her amnio. I am not sure whether or not the "experts" attributed it to that, but she grievously regrets having it, but she was told she must because she was over 35.

    My sister-in-law had an abnormal result on an alpha-fetal protein test. The nurse at her HMO called to schedule the abortion, along with the follow-up ultrasound (to save time and make sure that they could get her in). What she failed to state was that if you are even a few days off on your dating, this "mandatory" test can be completely inaccurate. There is a 55% false positive rate on the test, but it almost never misses a defect, so it is simply there to get the doctors to look more closely. But, as you said, clearly, the best end result, as determined by them, was killing the baby.

    Matthew is a fine, healthy ten year old.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Susan,
    I normally agree with you on just about everything. Here we disagree, though. I had an amnio after having a positive afp test. The reason My dh & I opted for it was to find out how our baby was. If there was a problem, we wanted to know so that we could be better mentally and practically prepared. Abortion was never in the equation. My son has Down Syndrome and I feel it was a blessing to know before hand. We had cardio ultrasounds done before birth and my pregnancy was closely monitored the whole way, not to mention the prayers prayed on his behalf by us, family and friends. We felt better prepared to welcome our wonderful little boy into the world. I know that society misuses this diagnostic tool to encourage abortions, etc. but choosing to have one isn't always wrong. I am glad we knew before Robby was born instead of experiencing the shock of finding out immediately after birth like a few families, I know.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Michelle, in the group in which this discussion again took place, the mothers are asking about amniocentesis because of the option to abort the baby. One said she had amnio for the same reasons you expressed. But many others say that they couldn't handle having another special-needs child.

    I am not saying that it is always wrong to have amnio. But I am saying that it is quite odd to hear people asking about the danger of amnio when a certain test result will result in the "pregnancy tissue" being eliminated. It's odd for a mother to care about the risk of miscarriage when the wrong test result will result in her intentionally causing miscarriage.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Michelle, I went back and looked at the post I originally wrote to see why you would've thought that I was condemning all amniocentesis. Then I saw why you responded as you did. My apologies. I adjusted the original post to more accurately reflect the situation I was responding to.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Susan, thanks for the clarification. I didn't take your first post too critically. I just wanted to add another perspective on amnios. I always enjoy reading your blog. It is often thought-provoking and frequently uplifting. I find encouragement in the things you say about having a child with special needs. Thanks again.

    ReplyDelete